ADESH ENTERPRISES LLP Vs. VINOD KUMAR GOSWAMI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There is a preliminary objection raised by the learned counsel for the Respondents to the entertaining of the present petition under Sec. 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 ('Act') on the ground that the lands in respect of which the interim relief is sought are located in Uttarakhand, outside the territorial jurisdiction of this Court.

(2.) In particular, reference is made by Ms. Manmeet Arora, learned counsel for the Respondents, to the decision in Harshad Chiman Lal Modi Vs. DLF Universal 2005 (7) SCALE 533 to state that it is only the Court within whose jurisdiction the land is located which will have jurisdiction to entertain a suit for specific performance pertaining to such land irrespective of where the parties are based. Reference is also made to the decisions of the learned Single Judge of this Court in PCP International Limited Vs. Lanco Infratech Limited 2015 SCC OnLine Del 10428 and Sravanthi Infratech Private Limited Vs. Tricolite Electrical Industries Limited 237 (2017) DLT 589.

(3.) On the other hand, learned counsel for the Petitioner relies on the decisions in Bharat Aluminium Company Vs. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc. (2012) 9 SCC 552 (hereafter 'Balco') and ION Exchange (India) Ltd. Vs. Panasonic Electric Works Co. Ltd. 208 (2014) DLT 597.